Gnarly Davidson’s Reviews > Jurassic Park > Status Update

i just saw Nnedi's review back from 2010, and i GREATLY greatly respect her as an author. yes, the book does have a lot of sexism and casual racism. i don't enjoy those parts whatsoever. however, it really doesn't shock me a bunch of rich white men playing God would be sexist and racist. it comes with the territory. if they weren't sexist and racist, they wouldn't fulfill the trope of patriarchal men OBSESSED with reproduction without women, and obsessed with creating life that does not need to be created whatsoever. very viktor frankenstein of them. like i said, i don't enjoy them, i hate most of the characters. but it would honestly be weird if they gave a shit about women and people of color, they don't even care about the sanctity of any life. they're selfish and all they care about is themselves. hammond i think has more humanity in the book than the movies, but he's still a classic rich white piece of shit. for me it's more of the casual racism from michael's narration, he really didn't need to throw it into the 3rd person god mode narrative. and as i've seen others express, yes the science isn't very good. the book came out in 1990, it may as well have been written in the dark ages when it comes to paleontology and genetics. he could have done better on the science, sure, but.... it's a book about cloning dinosaurs. which is literally not possible. i don't understand why people would read a book about something so outlandish and impossible and then complain the science isn't realistic. it's not realistic because it's not real and cannot happen! big shocked